Fixed, hopefully! On Dec 13, 2014, at 10:03 AM, Richard Eisenberg <e...@cis.upenn.edu> wrote:
> I think I've fixed this. I've pushed the fix to wip/rae, and waiting for > validation results before pushing to master. > > My hunch below was right -- it was the change to matchFam, which essentially > evaluated type-level functions more strictly. I've now made it lazier again. > I'd like to better understand the tradeoff here, and to see if there's a > principled sweet spot. But that will happen in a few days. > > Expect a push to master soon. > > Again, sorry for the bother. > > Richard > > On Dec 13, 2014, at 8:32 AM, Joachim Breitner <m...@joachim-breitner.de> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> >> Am Freitag, den 12.12.2014, 21:51 -0500 schrieb Richard Eisenberg: >>> >>> Phab has shown up some performance regressions in my recent commits. >>> See https://phabricator.haskell.org/harbormaster/build/2607/. The >>> failures except for haddock.base are new, and evidently my fault. They >>> didn't show up on Travis. Will look into it shortly, but I doubt over >>> the weekend. >> >> >> ghcspeed also observes this: >> http://ghcspeed-nomeata.rhcloud.com/changes/?rev=7256213843b80d75a86f033be77516a62d56044a&exe=2&env=johan%27s%20buildbot >> >> Especially the T9872 benchmarks have a huge increase in allocations. But >> you seem to be aware of this, so that’s fine. >> >> Greetings, >> Joachim >> >> -- >> Joachim “nomeata” Breitner >> m...@joachim-breitner.de • http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ >> Jabber: nome...@joachim-breitner.de • GPG-Key: 0xF0FBF51F >> Debian Developer: nome...@debian.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ghc-devs mailing list >> ghc-devs@haskell.org >> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-devs@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
